Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open offices are bad for us

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 377 posts

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#311

Post by wolfgke »

beachstartup wrote: post #122
gdulli wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Working remotely is one solution, but many companies don't think it would work for them. The problem for me is, I need to be generally around people during the day. I want to be able to work productively but have people to talk to face to face when I leave my office, go to meetings, lunch, etc. I don't dislike people and couldn't tolerate being too isolated. I just want a few walls around me.

that's pretty much what everyone wants. the problem is it's expensive.

> that's pretty much what everyone wants.

Not me at least. I'd strongly prefer to work completely around and not be among people. I accept that there are good economic reasons why companies want to have their employees in the same office suite, but if asked for my preference, I'd strongly object.

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#312

Post by paulryanrogers »

jMyles wrote: post #83
amyjess wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you worked in an early- or mid-stage startup in NYC or the Bay Area in the past... 10 years? ...why do you think I have no desire to move to either of those parts of the country or to work for a startup? I like to describe Silicon Valley as "degenerate" for a few reasons, and this is one of them. I'm perfectly happy working in the suburbs of Texas in a corporate environment (~500 employees, B2B telecom industr…

Unless I'm missing something, you weren't the person I was responding to, right? I'm not saying that the startup environment is great for everyone, but it has produced a compelling critique of the corporate environment. Clearly. Shared music, late nights, open plans, families, ping pong / pinball, and so on... These aren't per se the mark of a "boys club" in contrast to a "professional environment," they are a critiq…

"...industry-style work environment, and one that has been enormously successful..."

Seems to be confusing correlation with causation.

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#313

Post by wolfgke »

jimbokun wrote: post #268
smelendez wrote: post #21

Open offices are awful, but they're here to stay for the same reason more adults are living with roommates and relatives: high real estate prices. Working remotely is one solution, but many companies don't think it would work for them. Personally, I'd make the shared area for solitary work only: no work discussions longer than a minute at work areas (use a conference room, take a walk or Slack), no eating at work are…

"no eating at work areas" Coworker eating with mouth open at desk next to mine, a special kind of torture.

> Coworker eating with mouth open at desk next to mine

Isn't it strictly forbidden to eat near computers where you work? At the university's computer labs it was and at the place where I had internshipss it was also.

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#314

Post by wott »

jMyles wrote: post #83
amyjess wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you worked in an early- or mid-stage startup in NYC or the Bay Area in the past... 10 years? ...why do you think I have no desire to move to either of those parts of the country or to work for a startup? I like to describe Silicon Valley as "degenerate" for a few reasons, and this is one of them. I'm perfectly happy working in the suburbs of Texas in a corporate environment (~500 employees, B2B telecom industr…

Unless I'm missing something, you weren't the person I was responding to, right? I'm not saying that the startup environment is great for everyone, but it has produced a compelling critique of the corporate environment. Clearly. Shared music, late nights, open plans, families, ping pong / pinball, and so on... These aren't per se the mark of a "boys club" in contrast to a "professional environment," they are a critiq…

This startup scene so far never made sense to me, but now thanks to you I can see the light: it was an artistic militant happening! Hurray!

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#315

Post by blunte »

I knew this from years of experience, and I provided ample evidence (and research) on this problem to executive management at companies I worked for.

The sad fact is that PHBs, even well-intentioned ones, simply do not know what it's like to create multi-layer models in your mind and then develop from those models. They hear the marketing guys bullshitting all day about clients and thing that _that_ is work, progress.

In the end, it just means that the backbone of the modern company functions more poorly, and that revenues are potentially lower than they could be. Maybe the lower revenues are offset by the lower office rent costs; maybe the only real loss is the happiness (and loyalty/tenure) of the thought workers of the company.

This leads to another problem that we all suffer (via bugs, hacks, viruses, and otherwise lack of software quality) - that people running companies really have no concept what software is. I see no solution to this problem, since ultimately even the companies started by geeks get absorbed by bigger companies run by PHBs...

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#316

Post by blahedo »

wolfgke wrote: post #307
logfromblammo wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vaccine already exists. It was introduced to the US in 1786. Metaphorically speaking, many of our peers believe that this vaccine causes autism. It occasionally does cause illness more severe than those vaccinated against. It's collective bargaining through a cartel of skilled laborers. Unions. But like Brundlefly, those infected managers don't believe they have a disease. They're not getting worse , they're gett…

> It's collective bargaining through a cartel of skilled laborers. Unions. We don't need unions - we need developers who strongly refuse to work in open offices. Since there is a shortage of developers, this should suffice. The large problem is that too many developers are willing to compromise.

So you're saying that we need a category of workers to agree to refuse certain working conditions, but as a group so that individual compromisers don't undermine the action?

...but we don't need unions?

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#317

Post by gtaylor »

Maro wrote: post #98

I've been working in open office environments for the last 5+ years, also at one of AmaFaceGooSoft. I find it's a non-issue, it doesn't bother me or others, I can't recall a time in the last 1-2 years when someone complained about it. Saying that o.o. is not effective is a bit fishy given how successful some of the companies employing it are. I remember 10+ years ago at my first job we had a nice office building (it…

> I can't recall a time in the last 1-2 years when someone complained about it.

I don't like open office plans, but they're so common in the Bay Area that there's not much avoiding them. I don't want to work remote, and office configurations aren't the only thing I look for in a gig. So realistically, I'm probably going to be working in an open plan as long as I'm here.

It works and it's not a crippling thing to have to contend with, but not everyone is ideally suited for an open office plan. I think it disproportionately hurts people that have skills in certain things, wider responsibilities, or institutional knowledge that a number of others have to utilize. You can have the best organized, most complete documentation ever and this will still be an issue.

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#318

Post by user5994461 »

dasmoth wrote: post #294
user5994461 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. Offices for small team are the optimal solutions. Source: many years of experiences in open plan offices and team offices.

Do you have much experience of private offices?

I have some, it's only okay if you work alone for an entire project (that's rather uncommon). I don't mind being with 1-3 people in an office even if I work alone, bigger office, nicer.

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#319

Post by OJFord »

RandomOpinion wrote: post #259
sjclemmy wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why I just bought some of those Bose noise cancelling cans. Listen at a safe volume and block out noise. They're great.

> ...noise cancelling cans... Active noise cancelling systems generally only suppress continuous steady sounds, e.g. fan noise or motor hum. It actually makes conversations and other transient activities _more_ audible by reducing the background sound.

Solution: sit near your most monotonous colleagues.

Re: Open offices are bad for us

#320

Post by skj »

wolfgke wrote: post #307
logfromblammo wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vaccine already exists. It was introduced to the US in 1786. Metaphorically speaking, many of our peers believe that this vaccine causes autism. It occasionally does cause illness more severe than those vaccinated against. It's collective bargaining through a cartel of skilled laborers. Unions. But like Brundlefly, those infected managers don't believe they have a disease. They're not getting worse , they're gett…

> It's collective bargaining through a cartel of skilled laborers. Unions. We don't need unions - we need developers who strongly refuse to work in open offices. Since there is a shortage of developers, this should suffice. The large problem is that too many developers are willing to compromise.

Some, like myself, strongly prefer open offices.

I mean, I get why some people don't like them, but let's not pretend that the sentiment is universal.

Post reply on HN